Latest news with #NeutralExpert
See - Sada Elbalad
a day ago
- Politics
- See - Sada Elbalad
The Hague Court Rejects India's Suspension of Indus Waters Treaty
By Ahmad El-Assasy The Permanent Court of Arbitration (PCA) in The Hague has issued a supplemental award reaffirming its jurisdiction over the dispute between India and Pakistan under the Indus Waters Treaty (IWT). The tribunal concluded that India's unilateral attempt to suspend its participation in the treaty does not affect the ongoing arbitration proceedings. This ruling delivers a significant blow to New Delhi's legal stance, as it had claimed that the treaty was 'in abeyance' and the court had no authority to proceed. Treaty Cannot Be Unilaterally Suspended The Court emphasized that under Article XII(4) of the Indus Waters Treaty, the agreement remains legally binding on both parties unless mutually modified or terminated. It categorically rejected the idea that one country can withdraw or suspend its obligations under the treaty unilaterally. Legal experts say the ruling is a reaffirmation of the core principle of international law — pacta sunt servanda, or "agreements must be kept." Neutral Expert and Tribunal Both Remain Valid The PCA also clarified that both dispute resolution pathways under the treaty—the Neutral Expert and the Court of Arbitration—can proceed independently. India had argued that Pakistan's use of both mechanisms simultaneously violated the treaty. However, the tribunal ruled that once arbitration is initiated, its authority is established and cannot be overridden by such objections. Pakistan Welcomes the Decision Pakistan's Foreign Office welcomed the supplemental award, calling it a legal victory that strengthens the framework of the 1960 treaty. Islamabad confirmed that the hearings on the merits of the case—relating to India's construction of the Kishenganga and Ratle hydropower projects—were held in July 2024 and a decision is expected in due course. India Rejects the Ruling In contrast, India's Ministry of External Affairs rejected the court's decision, calling the tribunal 'illegally constituted.' It maintained that the treaty remains in abeyance and insisted that it does not recognize the PCA's jurisdiction in this matter. India has consistently argued that Pakistan's simultaneous recourse to both the Court and the Neutral Expert process created a procedural conflict under the treaty. A Broader Implication for Water Diplomacy This decision has wider implications beyond the India–Pakistan water dispute. It reaffirms the binding nature of international treaties and the authority of arbitration forums. Analysts view it as a victory for multilateralism and legal diplomacy in South Asia, particularly in a time of strained bilateral relations. read more Gold prices rise, 21 Karat at EGP 3685 NATO's Role in Israeli-Palestinian Conflict US Expresses 'Strong Opposition' to New Turkish Military Operation in Syria Shoukry Meets Director-General of FAO Lavrov: confrontation bet. nuclear powers must be avoided News Iran Summons French Ambassador over Foreign Minister Remarks News Aboul Gheit Condemns Israeli Escalation in West Bank News Greek PM: Athens Plays Key Role in Improving Energy Security in Region News One Person Injured in Explosion at Ukrainian Embassy in Madrid News China Launches Largest Ever Aircraft Carrier Sports Former Al Zamalek Player Ibrahim Shika Passes away after Long Battle with Cancer Videos & Features Tragedy Overshadows MC Alger Championship Celebration: One Fan Dead, 11 Injured After Stadium Fall Lifestyle Get to Know 2025 Eid Al Adha Prayer Times in Egypt Business Fear & Greed Index Plummets to Lowest Level Ever Recorded amid Global Trade War Arts & Culture Zahi Hawass: Claims of Columns Beneath the Pyramid of Khafre Are Lies News Flights suspended at Port Sudan Airport after Drone Attacks Videos & Features Video: Trending Lifestyle TikToker Valeria Márquez Shot Dead during Live Stream News Shell Unveils Cost-Cutting, LNG Growth Plan Technology 50-Year Soviet Spacecraft 'Kosmos 482' Crashes into Indian Ocean
Time of India
28-04-2025
- Politics
- Time of India
From Salal to Ratle, a series of constraints: Indus Waters Treaty and the cost of cooperation
While the Indus Waters Treaty (IWT) is often hailed as one of the most 'successful' international water-sharing agreements , a closer look at the disputes surrounding it tells a more sobering story. Rather than being a consistent triumph, India's experience with the IWT reflects a history of delays, operational compromises, and prolonged constraints, often stretching over decades. #Pahalgam Terrorist Attack India stares at a 'water bomb' threat as it freezes Indus Treaty India readies short, mid & long-term Indus River plans Shehbaz Sharif calls India's stand "worn-out narrative" Salal Project: The First Major Dispute The first major project under dispute was the 690 MW Salal hydroelectric project on the Chenab River in Reasi, Jammu and Kashmir. In 1968, as per treaty requirements, India submitted the project design to the Permanent Indus Commission (PIC) for Pakistan's review. Pakistan raised several objections concerning the dam's height, design, and diversion canals. Although India considered escalating the matter to the World Bank 's Neutral Expert mechanism , it eventually conceded to Pakistan's demands, keen to maintain the spirit of the 1972 Shimla Agreement. In 1978, India agreed to significant design modifications, including: Reduction in dam height Elimination of the operating pool Sealing of the crucial undersluices for sediment management The Salal project was completed in 1987 but soon suffered from sedimentation problems. Without the under-sluices, the reservoir quickly turned into an elevated riverbed, and the project's capacity fell to nearly 57%, severely impairing its efficiency and lifespan. Live Events Kishanganga and Ratle Projects: Disputes Continue The 330 MW Kishanganga project , launched in 2006, became the first project under the IWT to face arbitration at the Court of Arbitration (CoA). Pakistan objected to India's water diversion from the Kishanganga (Neelum) River and moved the CoA in 2010. The CoA's 2013 ruling was a mixed outcome for India: it allowed the diversion but mandated a minimum downstream flow to Pakistan. Dissatisfied, Pakistan sought further arbitration on Kishanganga's design in 2016. Simultaneously, Pakistan raised objections to the 850 MW Ratle project in 2012. In 2022, it initiated parallel proceedings at the World Bank, invoking both the CoA and Neutral Expert mechanisms. India opposed this dual-track approach and, for the first time, issued a formal notice to Pakistan on January 25, 2023, seeking treaty modification, followed by a second notice on August 30, 2024. As of now, both Kishanganga and Ratle projects remain pending before the Neutral Expert. Tulbul Project: A Dispute Left Unresolved The second major dispute centred around the Wullar Barrage/Tulbul Navigation Project, initiated by India in 1984 at the mouth of Wullar Lake on the Jhelum River. Pakistan objected, claiming it constituted a 'storage' project prohibited under the IWT. It raised the issue with the PIC in 1986, and construction was halted in 1987. Despite multiple rounds of bilateral discussions until 2006, the project's viability eventually eroded. Faced with Pakistan's persistent objections and broader diplomatic concerns, India effectively abandoned the Tulbul project, the longest unresolved dispute under the IWT. Baglihar Project: A Case Taken to the World Bank The 900 MW Baglihar hydroelectric project on the Chenab followed about a decade later. India served the mandatory prior notice to Pakistan in 1992, but objections soon surfaced, particularly concerning the gated spillways (added to prevent Salal-like sedimentation) and storage capacities. Tensions escalated after India awarded a construction contract in 1999. Eventually, the matter was taken to the World Bank in 2005, where Raymond Lafitte was appointed as the Neutral Expert. After extended proceedings, Lafitte's 2007 ruling largely upheld India's design, including the contentious gated spillways. The dispute was formally resolved in 2010.
